For the last week I have been trying three preamp combinations. The reason for doing so was two fold: 1. to determine whether the NAC82 had any viable competition, and 2. to determine whether a 32.5/Supercap was the best use of my resources.
The 3 preamp combinations tested were 32.5/SC; DNM 3B Primus; Dynavector L100. Apart from the Naim PSU all three are now superceded by newer models. Approximate cost to buy each new would be, 32.5/SC, £2500; DNM, £1800; DV, £2000.
Only the preamp and connecting cables were variables, the rest of the system remained the same: CDS2/CDPS; 250; B&W N805s. The 32.5 was connected with Naim cabling, the DNM with dnm cables and the DV with cables made up by the Chord company.
All equipment was warmed up/run in. Normal, blind and partially sighted tests were carried out. I had two friends to help me listen (one an esteemed technical guru from this forum, the other a maker of drums) and also a guy from Dnm. It should be said that the gain on the Dnm may not be set up perfectly for the CDS2.
Vinyl was not tested since the DV is line only and the Dnm phono stage had never been used and was therefore regarded as unfairly disadvantaged.
So that I don't go on and on I have devised a numerical system for the results: marks out of ten for a variety of attributes. If you consider such a system totally meaningless, fine.
Nothing I say here has anything whatsoever to do with my annoyance that Blzebub was banned from the Forum, but it is fair to warn those who don't know that I never got along with the 82 and that I think the 52 to be a very fine preamp indeed.
The Results:
32.5/SC:
Pace 7, Rythm 8, Timing 7.5, Sweetness/Musicality 6, Dynamics 8, Clarity 6, Quietness 5, Round Earth 7.5, Bass Depth 6, Bass Control 6.
Total Marks (out of 100): 67
Dnm 3B Primus:
Pace 6, Rythm 7, Timing 8.5, Sweetness/Musicality 7, Dynamics 8, Clarity 8.5, Quietness 7, Round Earth 8, Bass Depth 8, Bass Control 6.5.
Total Marks (out of 100): 74.5
DV L100:
Pace 8, Rythm 9, Timing 10, Sweetness/Musicality 8, Dynamics 9, Clarity 9, Quietness 9, Round Earth 8, Bass Depth 7.5, Bass Control 8.
Total Marks (out of 100): 85.5
A few thoughts:
1. There was no compatability problem with the 250, running nice and cool all the while.
2. The Dnm would probably be better with Dnm or Crimson power amps and could also be better set up. Equally, the DV would probably sound better with DV power.
3. Naim amplifiers can do round earth stuff its the backs to the wall speakers that can't.
4. To my mind the DV would give the NAC 52 a very stern test at a fraction of the cost.
5. The DV L300 which replaces the L100 could be superb.
And here's (most of) who we listened to: Ricky Lee Jones, Bill Ray Vaughan, Ozric Tentacles, Moloko, Massive Attack, Porcupine Tree, Faithless, Dreadzone, Clash, Spock's Beard, Terry Bozzio, Steve Stevens, Beethoven, Mahler, Berlioz, Shostakovich.
[This message was edited by Alex S. on TUESDAY 23 October 2001 at 09:51.]
Posted on: 23 October 2001 by Alex S.
JC
I know you have chosen a Dnm and I applaud your choice. In my system it happens to under-perform probably because of the set up, the 250 or the N805s. Also my preamp is un-Mana'd. I would say that Andy and I thought it could become tiring, the dynamics being a little forced. Thinking about it more, I guess it deserves 7 for speed. Also, it is very much last year's model if that makes a difference. A Dnm is quite a departure from the Naim sound I am used to for sure.
I found the 82 to do all the Naim stuff very well I just didn't like its presentation - uncouth and aggressive and no great control in the bass.
I found the 32.5 about the same as 82 for pr&t, but warmer. It doesn't have many 'hi-fi' virtues and is noisy. Image and soundstage are surprisingly good though.
JW
I've heard a 52 five times but never in my own system. I think the DV L100 is virtually its equal but that is instinct and not based on any tests. Instinct also tells me that the L300 could take top honours.
Brian
The DV slots beautifully into a Naim system (one reason its been chosen). It does the Naim stuff really well and times better than anything I've heard. It is incredibly quiet and separates notes as well as a 52. AFAIR the 52 beats it in terms of the leading edge of notes and the handling of transients. The 52 defines instruments better probably but the DV runs it very close.
IMO the DV outperforms an 82/SC in every department and has wonderful bass control if not bags of bass.
The 250 runs barely warm at high volume (it'll probably blow up tomorrow and you can all laugh).
All I can really say is that DV warrants a serious listen. It suits me, but hi-fi is a subjective business. I'm sure many of you think I'm talking rubbish and that the 82 is far superior.
Alex
Posted on: 26 October 2001 by Andrew L. Weekes
Since Alex would willingly admit to not knowing anything about the internals of anything electronic, I'll post a little on his behalf, since I had to take a peek inside
It's fair to say the Dynavector pre-amp has turned all of my own ideas about designing world-class preamps on its head. Most of those ideas come from my experience and indoctrination of the laws of audio according to Naim.
DV have considerately scratched the markings from all of the important devices inside the pre, probably because there's nothing unique about the components used. Now are you sitting down, 'cos this bit might shock you?
I reckon the DV uses op-amps!
It uses IC based electronic input switching, and I'd hazard a bloody good guess that the active devices are op-amps. There's little discrete circuitry and the pre talks about it's low impedance output, capable of driving long cables. This comes from a 5 legged TO220 device which I reckon, horror of horrors, is a power op-amp.
I even looked under the PCB expecting to see some SM stuff, but it wasn't there!
It has an internal, but shielded toroid, and extensive regulation on-board, smoothing caps are modest (i.e. small by Naim standards).
It sounds bloody marvellous though, and has set me thinking about designing something similar, since there are some fabulous op-amps for audio on the market at present, and let's face it they're easy to work with.
As for bandwidth limiting, I didn't get chance to examine in that kind of detail, but there definitely isn't anything of the complexity of the time-aligned filters. Any roll-offs will be similar to those of early Naim amps, just simple RC circuits.
Since Alex is no longer using Naim amps either I don't think the bandwidth issue is a problem.
Andy.
Posted on: 28 October 2001 by Martin Payne
quote:
Originally posted by Paul Duerden:
When I first heard a Naim system it was on highly ferous sound Organisation stands. I was very impressed by the sound of the system and bought a 62 110 which eventualy turned into a 62 Hi Cap 250. In those days Naim were perfectly happy with ferous supports as were their dealers . Is the newer Naim kit more sensitive to ferous objects than the old stuff was? I mean if the ferous support so terminaly buggers up the sound of a Naim amp, those who bought them years ago must be deaf as posts, it also asks the question of how Naim managed to expand as a company.
I agree that this is a major issue, and it's something I struggle to understand. However, audio memory is much more fickle, rose-tinted even, than we give credit for. I bet if you took a good system on Hutter/Mana/Quad, etc (you choose) and put it back on Sound Org you'd be in for a real shock.
I wonder if part of the issue is the proliferation of RF pollution. Think of the 10,000 or so mobile phone masts in the UK (about to be quadrupled for 3G). Think of all the stuff in your house with embedded microprocessors (microwave, central heating controller, clock/radios etc, etc). This RF then causes designers to put mains filters into their kit. You may have a dozen or more items with Lingo-style mains filters in them permanently plugged into the mains (all the above microprocessor stuff, and PCs, phone chargers, TV, remote control table lamps, etc, etc, etc).
Do ferrous objects somehow making the kit more susceptible? I have seen reports that earthing of metal racks leads to great benefits for some (haven't tried it myself), which would certainly support this argument.
Bear in mind that I'm running active, so have a lot of cabling trailing around the place.
Also, there was a subtle change to the Naim sound around the time the "new" case style came in. The NAC72 was less warm than the 32.5/42.5/62, and the new transformers introduced a different sound, more dynamic and tight, but less warm. My memories of the move from old-style 32.5/hi/140 to new-style 72/hi/250 in one go are of struggling to calm down an 'edge'. Unrealised ferrous problems, perhaps? A friend still owns this kit, and it sounds great in his environment.
I presume your original experience was with a vinyl source? These still seem softer to me than CD.
For all the brilliant performance I've had from my system over the years, there have always been some tracks that just seem too in-your-face. It seems I can now happily play a wider range of music. Even the tracks that worked well with a bit of favouritism work even better when reproduced in an even-handed manner. This is not to say my system is now fully sorted in the current house, but the new racks have moved me another large step forwards.
quote:
Also what about speakers, anyone using ATCs DBLs etc have magnets that you just would not believe. I have seen a 12inch Atc driver and the magnet is gigantic. This must surely affect equipment a sight more than a ferous stand.
So far, I have not detected any problems when the metal is kept 2-3 feet from the system. I suspect that if the DBLs were that close to the kit it wouldn't last long.
quote:
Then there is the problem that if your stand is against a wall there is a strong possibility that the equipment is close to ferous objects. Near a radiator would be a complete no no.
Yup.
Audio Counsell also tell us that placing the gear near to mains sockets or blocks is bad. Difficult for me to get away from this, at the moment.
quote:
How do ferous objects affect my own Densen amp? I have played about with this when I briefly had the opportunity to try a Quaraspire rack, With neither my Micromega CD player nor my densen amp , could I detect a difference when a large metal weight was put on top of each one respectively. Of course I dont know what is in the wall in front of which the Quadraspire had been placed. This is obviously an unknown variable.
Are the cases of the Densen non-ferrous?
However, I had found some benefit removing ferrous items from near the kit even when using ferrous stands.
I'm told Linn were banging on about this issue nearly 10 years ago, although I wouldn't implicitly trust anything they say, given what I've heard at shows recently.
quote:
You will forgive me for not having the Linn in that test. Duty does not extend to taking large lead weights anywhere near a MC cartridge.
At least lead is non-ferrous!
cheers, Martin
